About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18
-span2, the fbi's top lawyer on how law-enforcement investigations are keeping up with new technology without breaking the law. that's followed by a house appropriations subcommittee looking into agriculture department spending. then "the communicators" with commissioner robert mcdowell. >> the nation's highest court is holding oral arguments this week on to gay marriage cases. the first people got in line thursday, and now the going rate for saving a seat is around $6000. a couple weeks ago director rob reiner explained why this is drawing such interest. here's a portion of what he had to say. >> one of the reasons we took on proposition eight, aside from the obvious reasons of marriage equality and we should all be treated as equal under the law and its, it was a bad initiative, and you know, the courts of our it overturned. we hope the supreme court will uphold those. those rulings. but it was partly an education process. we discover as we go along that, first of all, there's not one person in this audience, or anywhere, that doesn't have a gay person in the family or gay friend or
of law. [applause] and on the life question, it's really pretty simple. i went through the toughest election of my life last fall. i had tracking cameras around me from st. patrick's day until november 6th, one to three cameras always focused on me trying to get a second or a minute that they could run against me in an ad. they didn't get a single second that they could run against me, not one second, by the way. [applause] but they're in the business of trying to undermine and weaken us, and i didn't back up on any principle. we debated the issue of life, and i said my opponent, my leftist opponent cannot answer two questions on life. is human life sacred in all of its forms? yes, it is. and at what moment does life begin? the instant of conception. and the people on the other side of this question dare not answer either one of those questions. they know they lose the debate. i stood on life, and i stood on marriage -- [applause] and the thing that a bunch of people that have been backing away from these challenges don't seem to realize that i'm still standing. [applause] now, why
and we've tried to tackle both of those in our acquisition reform bill which is now law and which is taking some time to take hold. >> want to take advantage of my time for a minute and jump around a bit. we're talking about afghanistan but how do you think history is going to judge the obama administration's decision not to intervene in any significant military fashion in syria? 70,000 dead as you know and several million refugees. >> i think it's way too early how to predict how history is going to judge whether our policy is right. it's not too early to know how history will judge assad. that's easy. but in terms of whether or not we have proceeded in a more deliberate way than some would want us to, and probably a little more than i would want us to if you want to get into that, nonetheless the goal here is to make sure that what happens after assad is, is stable, is diverse, is not chaotic. that the right people are the ones that take over when assad goes. and that's, that's a matter of putting in place, if possible, a kind of an interim political coalition, which will have b
years. it was a law. every reasonable political observer admits the budget control act which had the force of law was a budget, period, but no because it was -- it was not a resolution, it was a law, which is much stronger than any resolution we do here. they have yelled and screamed, as i've indicated. still, republicans pined for the days of the so-called regular order and the senate would vote on a budget resolution that would set spending priorities for the fiscal year. republicans, we were told, we heard, we saw, were desperate to have a budget debate, desperate. let's -- and had charts out here. they were desperate for an amendment. they wanted a vote-a-rama, and they had charts, speeches and demonstrations to prove it. they had, mr. president, press conference after press conference after press conference. they even had a calendar that they brought out here almost daily telling the days since the senate passed a budget resolution -- not a law which was already in effect but a resolution. i was amazed yesterday, i mean amazed, flabbergasted, stunned when republicans blocked
sequestration had been signed into law. now, we didn't reach an agreement because republicans refused to include revenue, but we did agree then that deficit reduction to replace sequestration was deficit reduction. in fact, my colleague, senator toomey, put forward a plan to replace sequestration, to replace sequestration that he said would have -- quote -- "reduced our deficit by $1.2 trillion. mr. president, i find it odd that some republicans were willing to count replacing sequestration as deficit reduction when they were putting forth plans to do it, but they won't treat the senate budget the same way, especially since bipartisan groups including simpson-bowles and domenici-rivlin and the committee for responsible federal budgeting all used the same starting point that the senate budget does. like us, these groups know sequestration was not deficit reduction. it was there to trigger deficit reduction that would come from replacing it. that was the whole point. in fact, the center on budget and policy priorities noted that the senate budget uses the appropriate starting point, and i quote --
the committee that was supposed to find all the cuts failed. the sequester came into law. it's an antimilitary provision. it was put in by jack lew, a very liberal member of the president's, at that time, chief of staff for offic office of mot and budget. the president seems to be quite happy to see these cuts fall on the defense department. he seems to be happy to have this happen. why do you say that? i say, because he's done nothing to philadelphia it. -- to fix it except demand something that he has no right to demand. that is, to violate this agreement and raise taxes and spend more. and that's not going to happen. congress is not going to vote to violate the agreement they made with the american people just less than two years ago. if we give in on that, we might as well quit. and our colleagues say they want to have a balanced approach to the budget, and they're going to raise taxes, and most people hear that think that the taxes will be used to reduce the deficit. but it's not. the taxes are going to be used to fund more spending over the agreement we've had in place now for about 18 o
the health care law and increase the cost of care to our seniors, throw students off of their parents' plans, cost tens of millions more americans to be uninsured and put the insurance companies back in charge of patients' care. our budget rejects that approach, and it builds on the health care law to continue reducing costs responsibleably increasing efficiencies and improving care. our budget also maintains the key principle that every other bipartisan group has maintained but that has been rejected by the house republicans. we don't think the burden of deficit reduction should be unfairly borne by the most vulnerable children and families who have already sacrificed so much. everyone in america needs to be a part of this solution, but the house republican approach would shred the safety net that has offered a hand up to millions of families across america, including my own when we needed it, and, mr. president, we reject that approach. the budget we are considering this week also makes the investments we need to keep our military strong, to protect our communities and environment and upho
's the wrong thing for economic stability. it's the wrong kind of plan if made into law to help us grow our economy, create jobs, create wealth, get people over time and bonuses and pay raises, the kind of thing you have when the economy's growing. this budget is just the wrong medicine. i just have to say i strongly, strongly believe that it takes us in the wrong direction. what does it do at bottom? it raises taxes. it raises taxes, according to the chairman, by 1 point -- $1 trillion, $985 billion -- billion dollars. that's almost a trillion -- and we think it raises it $1.5 trillion. there is a reserve fund to make it easy to raise more taxes. i ask the chair to close that so it couldn't be used to raise taxes easily and see a decline which would continue to cause me to believe that that is an additional part. but regardless, a trillion dollars of new taxes is a huge, huge tax increase. in january of this year, the president got a $650 billion big tax increase on the rich. and so this is a huge additional tax cut. plus a trillion in tax cuts in the president's health care bill. so we ar
loans to our small businesses who are the job creators. and even 1 240*u f.b.i,000 f.b.d other law enforcement personnel. so, yes, i say to my friend who is not here -- who is leading the filibuster, the senator from kansas -- i hope he comes and shows up -- i hear him. i feel the pain he feels. i feel the pain he feels for a his state. i have a list that i won't bore you with that shows the cuts to my state. it is painful. but how do you solve it? not by amendment after amendment after amendment on a must-pass bill that the house has said, keep it simple or the government shuts down. not that way. but by turning to the democratic budget. where senator murray and the colleagues there have restored those cuts and they won't other ways to cut, better ways to cut, sensible ways to cut. so i call on my friends on the other side of the aisle, if you want to waste 10 hours, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 hours, it is your call. we will be here. but we are not going to put off the passage of the budget. it is too important. we will be here until it is done, and i yield my time back, and i tha
for her father-in-law, president martin van buren, who is a widower. we'll include your questions and comments by phone, facebook and twitter live tonight at 9 ian on c-span and c-span3, also on c-span radio and c-span.org. >> now,ous foreign affairs -- house foreign affairs committee chairman ed royce on u.s. policy towards the asia-pacific region. in remarks to the heritage foundation, he emphasizes the need to focus on economic prosperity in asia. he also discusses u.s./china relations, north korea's nuclear program and the trans-pacific partnership trade agreement. this is about 50 minutes. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. my name is edwin feulner, for the next 13 days i am the president of the heritage foundation. [laughter] i'm delighted to have with us in this morning my successor as the new president of the heritage foundation can, senator jim demint. we're very happy you're able to join us this morning for our 17th annual lecture. i welcome you all. it's good to see so many friends here, and it's particularly happy occasion for us to be able to co--host the receptio
mountains. well, this young lady was very smart. still is, but she was halfway through her first year of law school at the university of connecticut when she was diagnosed with stage four hodgkin's disease. not one, two or three but the worst, stage four. she had done everything right. she knew she needed insurance so she went to the university of connecticut and bought the best plan she could for students. so that she would have health insurance. but her cancer and the difficult treatment to fight it, she had to drop out of school. she had no insurance because insurance would not cover her. she was, as i said, no longer a student. she was no longer qualified for student health insurance. what was she to do? she needed a bone marrow transplant. her family, she thought there was a very strong possibility she would pass away, die. before obamacare, sara would have been one of tens of millions of americans who desperately need life-saving care but didn't have insurance to take care of it. before obamacare, sara might even have become one of the 45,000 americans who died each year because they l
? >> one of the big barriers is that there are no salvage laws in space. so if the united states were to start an initiative today to clean up all the debris, we don't own it. we can't just go and get it. and, you decide, are you going to get the little pieces? that would determine if you're going to use some of the techniques like foam to catch it, or do you go for the big ones? and from a legal perspective, if i went after a big piece of junk and grappled it and it broke apart and am i then legally liable for the damage caused to rich dalbello's satellites? so there are many legal issues to be considered. and then the political and geostrategic. if, for example, you are using lasers. well, i'm certain if the united states started to start using lasers to deorbit large pieces of debris, that would make other countries of the world very nervous. just as it would legitimately make the united states very nervous if other countries were to do the same of the so i think there is just a host of not just technical problems but legal and political problems but debris and the neoissue i think
during his time working on his law degree at the university of miami. a time to reflect and look forward happens in any party that loses, but it doesn't lessen the sting when you're the recipient. mr. priebus has been working on a way to rally the faithful and plot a new strategy for the midterm election in 2014 and presidential contest in 2016. one of the silver linings which happened along the way is getting reelected as party chairman. to create a playbook for his silver lining, he also commissioned an inward look to see why the party failed to win and how to get a different result next time. so what did he come up with? he said yesterday on cps' "face the nation" that the rnc will spend $10 million on staff to communicate its principles across the u.s., shorten the time spent on election primaries, move up the convention date and limit the number of primary debates. findings on the so-called occupancy are what brings him here this morning. he's also celebrating his 42nd birthday here on our stage. >> 43. >> 41, i'm sorry. [laughter] young enough that it won't make a difference. to ce
federal agencies are trimming their budgets as called for by the sequestration law that went into effect early this month. see the house hearing life 1:00 p.m. hearn on c-span3. >>> fourth four years ago today we began to providing televised access to the congress and federal government. c-span networks created by america's cable companies in 1979 and brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> president obama leaves this evening for a three-country visit to the middle east it is his first trip to israel as u.s. president. he will arrive wednesday and meet with israeli president perez in jerusalem and in the afternoon with prime minister netanyahu. thursday president obama will go to the west bank where he will meet with palestinian authority president abbas. he will return to jerusalem for a speech on thursday night and friday the president will visit jordan. he will meet with king abdullah. he has a number of speeches and planned visits along the way. president obama will return to washington on saturday. >>> yesterday, two former middle east advisors to the whit
of a product should be in its price. nonrepealable laws of nature, laws of physics, laws of chemistry are at work and history's judgment will be harsh if we continue to fail in respecting those laws. i urge a "no" vote and yield back to the senator from washington. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: mr. president, i raise a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane to the underlying resolution and therefore violates section 305-b-2 of the congressional budget act of 1974. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: mr. president, i move to waive section 305-b-2 of the congressional budget act for consideration of the pending amendment number 261 pursuant to 904-c of the congressional budget act of 1974. and would ask for a volt. mrs. murray: ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll on the motion to waive the budget acted. -- motion to waive the budget act. vote: the presiding officer: is there anyone wishing to vote or change their vote
a couple of years now since we passed the health care law, it's becoming evident to all americans that there were, in fact, many new taxes, almost a trillion dollars of new taxes in the health care law. and despite the president's firm pledge at that time not to raise taxes by even one dime on middle-class americans, i at that time asked the joint tack committee to evaluate the law and tell us if there were such took in the law. the letter i received back from joint tax indicated there were at least seven taxes in the health care law that did squarely hit the middle class, and not just in a small way. it's about at least a quarter of a trillion dollars of new taxes that the middle class will pay if we don't fix it. in fact, it's 73 million american families that will ultimately pay this new tax in the obamacare legislation if we don't reform it. so this is an amendment i have brought during the consideration of the health care law. it was defeated then by a claim that there were no taxes in the bill. we now know there are took in the bill. this is just our chance now that these ta
of the process. complementing the law -- implementing the law is another part of the process. if we don't have faith in this administration now, what about trust for the future? so my amendment would require the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement to submit weekly reports. just submit reports to the house and senate committees on appropriations and the judiciary. the reports will be required to contain detailed budget on how i.c.e. will maintain the 34-,000 detention bed occupancy levels authorized by congress. it also requires i.c.e. to provide the number of aliens released from detention as well as the following information on -- following information on aliens' release for budget-related purposes, the conviction or charge for which they were detained, fugitive status, existing of prior deportation order and the release -- terms of release. my amendment has been to be cosponsored by inhofe, vitter, boozman, mcconnell. and that's the cosponsorship. within the last few days we've had the director of i.c.e., mr. morton testify yesterday in the house. chairman goodlatte said his testimony r
law basically established discretionary spending amounts so you technically did not need a budget in the last couple of years. but also democrats in the senate have just been getting hammered for not introducing a budget resolution and they finally decided that it's in their interest to have a plan out this year. >> so with all this work on these various budget proposals what is the endgame? what is next? >> well, there will probably be some attempt to get a compromise between a house and the senate budget resolutions. very unlikely that they will be able to compromise because they are so far apart. but there are some commonalities in these budgets even though there are great differences between them, and so these two plans could be the beginning of a bigger agreement over the next several months. the debt ceiling will have to be raised sometime this summer and these plans could become part of a larger plan to raise the debt ceiling. >> paul krawzak writes for cq roll call. thanks for talking with us today. >> thank you. >> president obama officially nominated thomas perez to be h
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18